11th Cir. Finishes What It Started in Crawford; Finds No Irreconcilable Conflict Between the Federal Bankruptcy Code and the FDCPA for Regulation of Debt Collectors Filing Time-Barred Proofs of Claims in Bankruptcy

In Johnson v. Midland Funding, LLC, 2016 WL 2996372, at *1 (C.A.11 (Ala.), 2016), the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit affirmed its previous ruling in Crawford — namely, that the FDCPA prohibits a debt collector from filing proofs of claim for time barred debts.

Under the Bankruptcy Code (“Code”), a “creditor … may file a proof of claim” in a bankruptcy proceeding. 11 U.S.C. § 501(a). The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) prohibits a “debt collector” from “us[ing] any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt.” 15 U.S.C. § 1692e. This Court held that a debt collector violates the FDCPA when it files a proof of claim in a bankruptcy case on a debt that it knows to be time-barred. Crawford v. LVNV Funding, LLC, 758 F.3d 1254, 1261 (11th Cir. 2014). In considering this case below, the District Court interpreted the Crawford ruling as having placed the FDCPA and the Code in irreconcilable conflict. We see no such conflict. Although the Code certainly allows all creditors to file proofs of claim in bankruptcy cases, the Code does not at the same time protect those creditors from all liability. A particular subset of creditors—debt collectors—may be liable under the FDCPA for bankruptcy filings they know to be time-barred. Because we find no irreconcilable conflict between the FDCPA and the Code, we reverse.